Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!yale!husc6!think!rutgers!sri-spam!sri-unix!hplabs!tektronix!uw-beaver!cornell!svax!belmonte From: belmonte@svax.cs.cornell.edu (Matthew Belmonte) Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc Subject: Re: A and not A Message-ID: <591@svax.cs.cornell.edu> Date: Fri, 10-Oct-86 17:24:51 EDT Article-I.D.: svax.591 Posted: Fri Oct 10 17:24:51 1986 Date-Received: Thu, 16-Oct-86 06:24:41 EDT References: <3539@umcp-cs.UUCP> <117400049@inmet> Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept. Lines: 35 Summary: Heraclitus In article <117400049@inmet>, janw@inmet.UUCP writes: > Paraphrasing Heraclitus, you cannot enter the same system > twice. No, that's paraphrasing Plato's misinterpretation of Heraclitus. Plato said that Heraclitus said that "you could not step into the same river twice." The real fragment is "Upon those who step into the same river flow other and yet other waters." I think Heraclitus must be one of the most misinterpreted philosophers. The same river continues to exist as such, but its composition changes. It becomes warmer and cooler as the seasons change. It may flow into a desert or sea somewhere and cease to exist as such. The _logos_ is in constant flux. There is opposition in everything. But things can change in their accidental properties and still remain what they are (were). It is only when the set of essential properties no longer fits the definition of thing that new-thing has ceased to be thing. We don't define "river" as containing certain waters or containing waters of a certain temperature. (Please no flames about water's freezing and boiling depending upon temperature; I'm saying "certain temperature," not "certain temperature range.") Therefore, when a river warms or cools or flows we still believe that it's the same river. A final comment about _A_ and "not _A_" -- let's be sure what we mean by "not _A_." Define the set B as - {A} if A is an individual (Yes, I know this is debatable for most A.) - A if a is a set By not-A, we could mean "the opposite of A" or we could mean, more generally, the set U-B, where U is the universe. Unless the universe is restricted to A and its opposite, then these two interpretations are not equivalent. -- Matthew Belmonte ARPA: BITNET: UUCP: ..!decvax!duke!duknbsr!mkb